D, how would you have Luke, in teaching pagan Greeks, speak about the theosis of a former sinner? Of course he speaks in terms of joy. After the Incarnation, it was and is appropriate to speak of God in anthropomorphic terms. The danger comes when one moves from anthropomorhic terminology to attributing human reactions to God as a matter of fact. The Fathers all used terminology from Greek philosophy to make theological points. A bad result of that was the rise of true Neo-Platonism in some and true Aristotelianism in others, notwithstanding the fact that the original users of Platonic or Aristotelian vocabulary and constructs absolutely rejected those philosophies. The bad result of believing that God is moved by emotion the same way we are is that it transforms God into a being moved by necessity and that, D, is heresy.
Thank you for your reply.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "necessity." Are you speaking of it in a particular philosophical sense?
What do you think the following means?
Hebrew 8:3
"Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices, and so it was necessary for this one also to have something to offer."
When Jesus wept at the tomb of Lazurus that wasn't anthropomorphic, too, was is?
Cordially,